Obama to Troops: Shut up and Die

Congress steps up demands for info on Benghazi attack…
White House dodges…
FACEBOOK Censors Navy SEALS to Protect President…
‘The mysterious media Benghazi bugout’…
WASHPOST: ‘LINGERING QUESTIONS’…
LENO: ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell is back … Obama’s new policy for questions about Libya’…

If this guy were a Republican there would be screams for a Grand Jury investigation.  But our state-run media and Antiwar Left don’t care about our troops when the Greater Good is protecting Obama.

There’s a reason so many troops support Ron Paul.

"...and now the system has flagged my reply as spam. I replied that it wasn't. ..."

Christianist “Prolife” Pundit Kevin Williamson…
"“Confronted with a cancer or a slum the Pantheist can say, ‘If you could only ..."

Not coincidentally….
"No. I used "God-damned" with exacting theological precision to refer to God-damned sins, not sinners. ..."

Not coincidentally….
"Robert Woodman is claiming that Mark has been cursing and using God's name in vain ..."

Not coincidentally….

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Scott

    But Ron Paul is not running for anything anymore. We need to get over it.

    • Typical American.

      You’re people are so screwed. I just wish you wouldn’t continue to destroy our country in the process…

    • Typical American.

      Your people are so screwed. I just wish you wouldn’t continue to destroy our country in the process…

    • ivan_the_mad

      That is hardly the point here.

    • Harold B.

      No – the point in saying “There is a reason so many troops support Ron Paul” is that the troops support Ron Paul because of his foreign policy. We need to adopt Ron Paul’s foreign policy is the point. We need to do this before we are the most hated country in the world because we keep going into other countries and killing their people (the fact that many are “accidents” does not help anything – taking a life is taking a life). We need a friendly, non-interventionist foreign policy now!

      • Ted Seeber

        “before”?

        I think we’re about 40 years too late, mate.

    • I suspect that next time around it’s going to be Rand Paul picking up dad’s standard. He might just do a better job at it.